logo
Will Trump's new spending law make college tuition more expensive?

Will Trump's new spending law make college tuition more expensive?

USA Today11 hours ago
Lending caps and Medicaid cuts in the new reconciliation law will likely raise costs for students nationwide, experts say.
WASHINGTON – Vashti Trujillo was hoping to get a master's degree. But she's worried that President Donald Trump just put it out of reach.
The president's massive tax and spending law is set to slash the federal student loan programs the 21-year-old junior at Colorado State University Pueblo would likely need to pay for one. Education experts also predict the legislation will put strains on the budgets of many public universities like the one Trujillo attends. That's because the law may push state legislatures to reroute funds from higher education to safety-net programs, such as Medicaid, which the spending law cuts drastically.Those changes could ultimately raise tuition prices for students like Trujillo – or force them to put plans for graduate school on hold to help support family members who've lost their health care.
"This bill is attacking all angles of a student's life," she said.
Trujillo, who is double majoring in mechatronics engineering and data analytics, is among many U.S. college students wondering whether Trump's first signature legislative achievement in his second term may raise costs for them.
The unease isn't just hitting students; it's omnipresent for college administrators. Federal funding is dwindling. The supply of tuition-paying students is starting what will be a protracted decline. And the Trump administration's immigration enforcement policies have shaken the college-going prospects of international students, a population many U.S. universities need to survive.
Read more: International college students bring billions to the U.S. Here's why that may change.
While Trump's big spending measure stabilizes some funding streams for higher education programs, including Pell Grants, it mostly takes money away at a time when even the richest of universities are already under financial strain.
In the years to come, new student loan repayment programs created by the law will raise bills for millions of borrowers. Universities will feel a need to shift more support toward graduate students and away from undergrads. Many state legislatures, meanwhile, may deprioritize support for higher education.
Still, the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are confident the new budget law will bolster college oversight and, ultimately, lower prices for students.
"By establishing loan limits, the bill closes the open spigot of federal subsidies that drive up college costs and burden families," Education Secretary Linda McMahon posted on X after the Senate passed the measure. "The bill also simplifies and streamlines student loan repayment for millions of borrowers."
Read more: What will student loans look like after Trump's spending bill is signed?
Nathan Grawe, an economics professor at Carleton College, called the spending law "a harbinger of challenges ahead" for higher education.
"Whether public or private, colleges and universities are deeply dependent on funding from a federal government, which has spent far beyond its means," he said.
Ending Grad PLUS, capping Parent PLUS
While they're not coming right away, big changes to the student loan system will begin to impact borrowers in 2026.
Parents will soon face new limits on how much they can borrow in federal loans to finance their children's education. (The new cap is $20,000 per year per student, with a $65,000 total limit.)
After July 1, 2026, there will be just two repayment programs for anyone who takes out new loans, while some plans for current borrowers will sunset in 2028.
There will be new caps on graduate student borrowing, too. And the Grad PLUS program, which for decades has helped students pursue careers in medicine, law and other training-intensive careers, will be unavailable to new students. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, about half of all medical students take out Grad PLUS loans annually, which are based almost entirely on the cost of attendance.
Kim Cook, the CEO of the National College Attainment Network, a college access group, said any losses in grad students could have eventual trickle-down effects for colleges' larger financial aid budgets.
For the time being, however, Cook said many college counselors are focusing this summer on clearing up widespread confusion about what the law does – and doesn't – impact. Students, she said, don't all seem to understand what forms of financial aid remain in place.
"Federal student aid still exists," she said. "Pell Grants still exist."
That confusion alone, she said, could prevent some students from going to college at all.
Medicaid, SNAP cuts tied to college costs
Arguably, the most controversial components of the new law are the reductions in major safety net programs.
A roughly $1 trillion funding cut to Medicaid, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will kick millions of Americans off their health insurance, takes effect in 2028. More than 20 million Americans will also lose some or all of their benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.
Read more: How Trump's tax bill could cut Medicaid for millions of Americans
The ripple effects of the Medicaid and food stamp provisions will reverberate across public colleges and universities. In the absence of federal funding, state legislatures will be forced to fill the gaps. As lawmakers look to balance their budgets, savings will be needed elsewhere.
When that happens, funding for higher education is often the first thing on the chopping block, said Tom Harnisch, the vice president for government relations at the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association.
"States are just going to have to make really difficult choices," he said. "And historically, what we've seen is that when they have to make difficult choices, higher education bears the brunt."
In Colorado, state lawmakers are already shortchanging colleges' requests for money to help make up for federal funding cuts. But Trujillo, the CSU Pueblo student, doesn't have much time in between her multiple jobs to worry about that.
She's the first in her family to attend college. Through Pell Grants, scholarships and state and institutional financial aid, she's managed to avoid taking out any student loans, public or private, so far. She knows a master's degree would probably lead to a higher salary in the engineering field, but the thought of potentially having to rely on private lenders to get one makes her nervous.
"I'm very scared of private loans," she said. "I've heard horror stories."
Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

There's hope again for Pennsylvanians who want recreational marijuana legalized in the state. Maybe
There's hope again for Pennsylvanians who want recreational marijuana legalized in the state. Maybe

Miami Herald

time29 minutes ago

  • Miami Herald

There's hope again for Pennsylvanians who want recreational marijuana legalized in the state. Maybe

HARRISBURG - Recreational marijuana is back on the table for state lawmakers. But it's still a long way away from being legally sold in Pennsylvania. Adult-use cannabis came the closest it's ever gotten to being legalized in Pennsylvania in May, after the state House passed a proposal to allow state-owned stores to run a burgeoning legal marijuana market that nearby states have said has brought in tens of millions of dollars in additional revenue each year. But a state Senate committee quickly killed the bill, citing opposition from both Democrats and Republicans to the state-store model. Now, lawmakers are trying a different approach. State Sens. Dan Laughlin, R-Erie, and Sharif Street, D-Philadelphia, introduced their own proposal Thursday to legalize recreational marijuana by relying on current medical marijuana retailers to kick off the expansion of the market, while setting aside 15 licenses for small businesses to try to get a piece. The two lawmakers have worked on adult-use cannabis legislation in the past, the culmination of which came together in the bill introduced this week that Laughlin said was "years in the making." Under their bill, anyone in Pennsylvania who is 21 or older would be allowed to possess, consume, purchase, or transport adult-use cannabis. Senate Republicans have broadly opposed legalizing recreational marijuana, though Laughlin has remained a supporter for years. And support appears to be growing, Street said, noting that the bill has bipartisan support in the House and Senate. A similar bill will be introduced in the state House in the coming weeks, said Street, who last week launched his campaign for Congress. "There is legitimate representation and input from all four caucuses in the construction of this bill, and I think that's important to ultimately getting a bill that can get to the governor's desk," Street said. Under the bill, legalization of recreational marijuana would be monitored by a new, seven-member oversight panel of political appointees, titled the Cannabis Control Board, to be led by an executive director and chief medical officer. It would also move the Department of Health's current purview of the state's medical marijuana program to the new board. Senate Bill 120 also would allow nonviolent marijuana offenses to be expunged from a person's record, as well as try to target the benefits of the new industry to "disproportionately impacted areas" by the criminalization of marijuana. Among the other proposals in the 181-page bill introduced Thursday: -Edible forms of marijuana would be allowed to be sold in retail stores, which are currently unregulated in Pennsylvania. -Residents could have two mature marijuana plants at their homes. -Marijuana usage would be banned from all public places, including sidewalks and alleys. -Possession would be limited to 30 grams of cannabis flower, 1,000 milligrams of edible THC, or 5 grams of cannabis concentrate. -The proposal also suggests additional fixes to the state's medical marijuana law, including how employers should handle medical marijuana users in the workplace. Under the legislation, employers cannot fire or refuse to hire someone because they have a medical marijuana card, but can fire them if they are not doing their job properly due to their marijuana usage. They can also drug test if it is seen as necessary for "safety-sensitive positions." Laughlin said in an email that there is "no timetable" on when he will call up the bill for a vote. As the chair of the Law and Justice Committee, he previously fast-tracked the House recreational marijuana bill for a vote, where it ultimately failed to pass the committee and will not be reconsidered. Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman, R-Indiana, threw cold water on any hopes that recreational marijuana could be legalized as part of this year's budget, which Gov. Josh Shapiro has repeatedly proposed as a new source of state revenue. Pennsylvania's state budget was due by the start of this fiscal year, and is now nearly two weeks late, with no budget deal in sight. In a statement, Pittman said he does not "see a prevailing view for legalization of recreational marijuana within our caucus as part of the current budget." Still, Street said he remains optimistic it could be part of this year's budget, or next year's. He pointed out that the state would receive approximately 25% of the funds generated by the licensing and sale of marijuana, which he said could help fund Pennsylvania's mass transit systems, as SEPTA and other agencies face a fiscal crisis. "Realistically, we need more revenue, and this is a good alternative," Street added, in reference to the state's $5.5 billion budget gap. Even boxing champion Mike Tyson, who in April was named CEO of a Las Vegas-based cannabis company, chimed in to voice his support of the bipartisan effort to legalize recreational marijuana. "Encouraging to see the PA GOP introduce a rec bill today," Tyson wrote on X Thursday. "This bill would ensure that PA residents have access to safe, tested cannabis as opposed to the unsafe, untaxed pesticide laden stuff the illicit cartel operators are selling." The Laughlin-Street proposal would also allow the behemoth multistate operators that control much of Pennsylvania's medical marijuana market to continue to do so, though the legislation would limit the number of storefronts a single company can have to 24. The medical marijuana industry broadly praised the bill on Thursday as one "poised to create thousands of jobs" that "ensures equitable access," according to a news release from the Pennsylvania Cannabis Coalition. Meanwhile, opponents of adult-use cannabis quickly rejected it. "Lawmakers should prioritize the public health and safety of Pennsylvania families, not hand over our children and neighborhoods to the marijuana lobby," said Dan Bartkowiak, chief strategy officer at the ultraconservative Pennsylvania Family Council, in a news release. Laughlin can call up the bill for a vote in his committee at any time, though sweeping policy changes or new revenue generators are usually negotiated as part of a final budget deal, Street said. _____ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.

Trump Gets ‘Ratioed' on Truth Social for First Time Amid Epstein Backlash
Trump Gets ‘Ratioed' on Truth Social for First Time Amid Epstein Backlash

Miami Herald

time29 minutes ago

  • Miami Herald

Trump Gets ‘Ratioed' on Truth Social for First Time Amid Epstein Backlash

President Donald Trump's weekend post defending Attorney General Pam Bondi's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files has triggered an unprecedented backlash, marking the first time the Republican has been "ratioed" on his own social media platform, Truth Social. The term "ratioed" refers to when a social media post receives more replies than likes or shares, often signaling more disagreement or criticism than support. In his Saturday evening post, Trump lashed out at those criticizing Bondi, calling her performance "FANTASTIC" and dismissing the ongoing interest in Epstein as a waste of time. "We're on one Team, MAGA, and I don't like what's happening," the president wrote. "Let's not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about." The post—lengthy, defensive, and directed at his own base—appears to have backfired. According to public engagement data archived from Truth Social, the post has garnered more than 36,000 replies, compared with nearly 11,000 re-truths (the platform's term for shares) and 32,000 likes as of 10:45 a.m. ET Sunday. The backlash on Truth Social reflects growing internal division among MAGA supporters, many of whom have spent months anticipating revelations from the so-called "Epstein Files." Unlike mainstream social media platforms, Truth Social was designed as a haven for Trump and his supporters, where engagement overwhelmingly leans positive. The internal rift appears to stem from growing frustration over unfulfilled promises related to the Epstein case. Trump and several of his allies had long suggested that secret documents, including a so-called "client list," would be released under his administration. Bondi had previously claimed to possess such a list. But last week, the Justice Department announced that no list exists and reaffirmed that Epstein acted alone, dying by suicide in jail in 2019. The anticlimactic conclusion and the administration's refusal to release further files sparked fury from parts of Trump's base, especially activists and influencers who had built expectations around broader revelations. At the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit in Tampa this weekend, chants calling for Bondi's resignation could be heard. Trump's post defending her appeared to be a direct response to that dissent, but it only fueled it further. A user called Mother Rosie wrote: "This statement breaks my heart, Mr. President. I have four daughters, and live in Texas, where families lost little children. I can't even begin to comprehend the flipped narrative that 'it was so long ago' 'why are we still talking about this' and 'nobody should care.' These victims were some ones daughters, sisters, nieces, granddaughter. Someone's child. Please reconsider, sir. I voted for everything you are doing! Accountability was not something negotiable." Another woman, Crissy, who can be seen wearing a Trump-supporting beanie in her profile picture, said: "We want the ELITE PEDOS exposed! You promised us that. Pam promised us that. Kash promised us that. Now it's OUR fault bc we want that promise fulfilled and call Pam out every time she lies? What else has she lied to us about?" A third user, Dewayne Sykes, said: "This is going to cost you so many supporters. I being one of them." There will still some people speaking out in support of Trump in the comments, including from Navy veteran known as Robby F, who said: "We all want to know. But President Trump only has the evidence that these criminals left for him to find. If he gets his hands on anything that's useful, we will know." The data comes from an open-source GitHub repository which scrapes and stores all of Trump's Truth Social posts along with public metrics including reply count, like count, and re-truths. Using this dataset—which includes over 1,000 posts since 2022—Newsweek applied a filter to identify any posts where the number of replies exceeded both likes and shares. Only one post met that condition: the July 12, 2025 post defending Pam Bondi. Other posts in the archive occasionally drew large reply volumes, but in every case until now, likes or re-truths outnumbered them. This post represents the first—and so far only—time Trump was publicly rebuked by more of his own followers than supported him. FBI Director Kash Patel wrote on X on Saturday afternoon: "The conspiracy theories just aren't true, never have been. It's an honor to serve the President of the United States @realDonaldTrump—and I'll continue to do so for as long as he calls on me." Far-right political activist Laura Loomer on Saturday wrote on X: "President Trump says he thinks Blondi [sic] is 'doing a Fantastic job' as AG in a post he posted on Truth Social today...." Charlie Kirk, conservative founder and president of Turning Point USA, wrote on X: "President Trump on the Epstein Files, says he supports Pam Bondi at AG, the files are untrustworthy and created by Comey and Brennan. He wants his Justice Department focused on the voter fraud, the rigged election, ActBlue, and arresting thugs and criminals." While Trump used his Truth Social post to try shift focus away from the Epstein controversy, his followers seem unconvinced. The administration now faces the challenge of reuniting a fractured base ahead of the 2026 midterms elections. Related Articles India Accuses Pakistan of 'Violations,' After Trump Announced CeasefireTulsi Gabbard Outlines Four Key Priorities if ConfirmedTrudeau's Tariff Response: What Is IncludedFox News' Tucker Carlson Admits Trump Is A 'Full-Blown BS Artist' and 'Compulsive Self-Promoter' 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

Democrat Ro Khanna Demands Vote To Release Full Jeffrey Epstein Files
Democrat Ro Khanna Demands Vote To Release Full Jeffrey Epstein Files

Miami Herald

time32 minutes ago

  • Miami Herald

Democrat Ro Khanna Demands Vote To Release Full Jeffrey Epstein Files

Representative Ro Khanna (D‑CA) has announced plans to force a vote in the House of Representatives demanding the full, unredacted release of all documents related to disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In a post on X, formerly Twitter, Khanna said he will introduce an amendment this week that would require the House Speaker to bring the measure to a roll-call vote, putting every member of Congress on the record. Newsweek contacted Khanna's team via email and House Speaker Mike Johnson via online form for comment outside of usual working hours on Sunday. As reported by Newsweek, Epstein, who died in prison six years ago while facing sex trafficking charges, had maintained close ties with numerous high-profile figures around the world. Though his death was officially ruled a suicide, speculation has persisted for years that he may have been murdered to prevent the release of a so-called "client list," a roster some believe could implicate prominent political figures, including President Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton, and the U.K.'s Prince Andrew. After being accused of sexual abuse connected to the Epstein scandal, Prince Andrew denied all accusations against him and resigned from royal duties in 2020. Clinton maintains that he did not have any contact with Epstein after the financier was accused of sex crimes, and never visited his now-infamous private island of Little St. James in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The controversy was reignited last month when billionaire Elon Musk alleged, in a since-deleted social media post, that the government had withheld Epstein-related records because "Trump is in the Epstein files." The president dismissed the claim, saying he "had nothing to do with it," but it sparked further interest in the government's records. Trump has denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein, although they were known to have interacted in social and professional circles in the early 2000s. The former president distanced himself from Epstein after the financier admitted soliciting prostitution from a minor in Florida and was sentenced to 18 months in prison in June, 2008. During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump pledged to make Epstein-related files public. A partial release occurred in February, overseen by Attorney General Pam Bondi. But earlier this week, both Trump and Bondi announced that their investigation had turned up "no incriminating 'client list,'" prompting sharp criticism from Democrats, and even backlash from some of Trump's own MAGA supporters who had anticipated deeper revelations. A memo, first reported by Axios, said investigators found "no incriminating 'client list'" and "no credible evidence ... that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals." It also said video footage from the Manhattan jail where Epstein was being held when he died supported a medical examiner's finding that he had died by suicide. In a TruthSocial post on Saturday, Trump urged others to "not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about." Late Saturday, Khanna posted to his X account: "Why are the Epstein files still hidden? Who are the rich & powerful being protected? On Tuesday, I'm introducing an amendment to force a vote demanding the FULL Epstein files be released to the public. The Speaker must call a vote & put every Congress member on record." The post has since had over 432k views. Khanna's initiative is seen as a way to hold both Congress and the Justice Department accountable, especially as the Department of Justice (DOJ), led by Trump-appointed officials, including Bondi, recently reversed its previous commitment to release more documents. The move is also politically strategic. If Khanna's proposal is accepted, it would force a House vote on releasing the full Epstein files, allowing the public to see how each representative stands on the matter, with many praising it as a savvy political move that puts pressure on those trying to avoid scrutiny. This comes after months of mounting bipartisan frustration. Though Democrats have led the charge, some Republican voices have also joined the call for full transparency. However, the Justice Department's decision to halt further disclosures has renewed criticism that the agency is protecting politically sensitive figures. Earlier this month, congressional Democrats, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin, called for the release of any documents mentioning Trump. In response to criticism of his proposal on X, Khanna said: "This is about transparency and restoring trust, not partisan politics. The public outcry is apparent. The files should be fully released and can be done so consistent with DOJ principles of protecting victims and the innocent." Even if the measure fails, Khanna's supporters argue it will create a clear public record—either the files will be released, or voters will know exactly who stood in the way. With trust in government transparency at stake, the coming vote could mark a pivotal moment in the long-running Epstein saga. Related Articles Republican Backs Push to Repeal Part of Trump Bill Days After Voting For ItExclusive: Ro Khanna on War Powers and Avoiding Another 'Endless' ConflictSenator Says War Powers Resolution Against Trump Will Have GOP SupportWar Powers Act Explained as Thomas Massie, Ro Khanna Push House Resolution 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store